Posted by burnsy483 on 1/23/2013 4:00:00 PM (view original):I'm surprised you didn't watch any of it. You told me that Brady couldn't make tight, accurate passes, and there's several on that video. I am confident that the video did not get every single great pass Brady made in his career, either. Show me the inaccurate passes on that video after you watch it.

The Pats did often have great defenses. Ironically, I think their best defense was in 2003, where Brady needed to play at his best in the Super Bowl because the defense allowed 29 points. That said, you've mentioned a few times here that Brady, himself, was successful because his offense carried him. So as for his o-line, it's been mentioned several times that Brady had average to poor offensive lines for his first 2 Super Bowls. And at best (I feel like I'm stretching here) his weapons for his first 3 Super Bowls were average, and Brady put up at least above-average numbers.

Can you do me a favor? Can you give me the names of the receivers below that are better than Deion Branch? (EDIT: Sorry, I'll make it easier. Worse than Deion Branch.) The guys below were weapons that other QBs had the opportunity to throw to during the period where the Pats won 3 of 4 Super Bowls. And Deion, being one of the major receivers on Brady's teams, that you claim carried him to Super Bowls. Thanks.

The thing with Brady, is he has all of the stats. 9th in career yards, 3rd in career passer rating, 9th in career completion %, 5th in career TD's, 2nd in career INT% (only Rodgers is better) which correlates to less INT's then pretty much everyone else above him on those lists (80th most ever, Manning is 20th, Elway 14th, heck even guys like Eli Manning, Warner, Dilfer have more career INT's), 22nd in TD% (tied with Peyton and Young and ahead of every other QB that you see in these conversations except Otto Graham), etc.

So while I think Brady is definitely over hyped, and certainly has benefited from the Patriots system, he has all the stats to clearly be one of the top 3 QB's since Elway retired and a top 10-15 QB all time (and depending on your metrics could realistically be in the top 5) and anyone that thinks otherwise is just crazy.

Posted by moranis on 1/25/2013 10:14:00 AM (view original):The thing with Brady, is he has all of the stats. 9th in career yards, 3rd in career passer rating, 9th in career completion %, 5th in career TD's, 2nd in career INT% (only Rodgers is better) which correlates to less INT's then pretty much everyone else above him on those lists (80th most ever, Manning is 20th, Elway 14th, heck even guys like Eli Manning, Warner, Dilfer have more career INT's), 22nd in TD% (tied with Peyton and Young and ahead of every other QB that you see in these conversations except Otto Graham), etc.

So while I think Brady is definitely over hyped, and certainly has benefited from the Patriots system, he has all the stats to clearly be one of the top 3 QB's since Elway retired and a top 10-15 QB all time (and depending on your metrics could realistically be in the top 5) and anyone that thinks otherwise is just crazy.

You can't ignore the evolution of the passing game brought on by a league determined to bring more offense to the table. To do so is moronic bordering on stupidity. Today's DBs can't barely touch a receiver, which allows for the timing passing game (with little receivers like the pats) to thrive.

You bring back the old rules, that the old QB's got their stats from, and Brady and the pats system is manhandled by bigger DBs who are able ot throw off the timing patterns-the very thing that people say is the way to be beat this pats offense.

To me, stats today aren't a fair measurable when going back in time to compare with the great gunslingers from before the "Mel Blount rule" came into being (1978 or 1979).

The breaking of Johnny Unitas consecutive game TD record does not hold the same value as when Unitas originally set the record. Todays video game rules is conducive to the breaking of the these legendary records and establishing other previously unreachable records/stats.

While that's legit, you still couldn't contact the WR with the ball in the air. I don't recall stacked receivers in the old days. Nothing from then, other than good tackling, stops the 3 yard slant from the back WR.

Posted by moranis on 1/25/2013 10:14:00 AM (view original):The thing with Brady, is he has all of the stats. 9th in career yards, 3rd in career passer rating, 9th in career completion %, 5th in career TD's, 2nd in career INT% (only Rodgers is better) which correlates to less INT's then pretty much everyone else above him on those lists (80th most ever, Manning is 20th, Elway 14th, heck even guys like Eli Manning, Warner, Dilfer have more career INT's), 22nd in TD% (tied with Peyton and Young and ahead of every other QB that you see in these conversations except Otto Graham), etc.

So while I think Brady is definitely over hyped, and certainly has benefited from the Patriots system, he has all the stats to clearly be one of the top 3 QB's since Elway retired and a top 10-15 QB all time (and depending on your metrics could realistically be in the top 5) and anyone that thinks otherwise is just crazy.

You can't ignore the evolution of the passing game brought on by a league determined to bring more offense to the table. To do so is moronic bordering on stupidity. Today's DBs can't barely touch a receiver, which allows for the timing passing game (with little receivers like the pats) to thrive.

You bring back the old rules, that the old QB's got their stats from, and Brady and the pats system is manhandled by bigger DBs who are able ot throw off the timing patterns-the very thing that people say is the way to be beat this pats offense.

To me, stats today aren't a fair measurable when going back in time to compare with the great gunslingers from before the "Mel Blount rule" came into being (1978 or 1979).

The breaking of Johnny Unitas consecutive game TD record does not hold the same value as when Unitas originally set the record. Todays video game rules is conducive to the breaking of the these legendary records and establishing other previously unreachable records/stats.

Sure, but it still means Brady is a top 2 QB of his era with Peyton. I mean unless you are telling me Brady had different rules than Brees, McNabb, Rothy, Eli, etc.

Posted by moranis on 1/25/2013 10:14:00 AM (view original):The thing with Brady, is he has all of the stats. 9th in career yards, 3rd in career passer rating, 9th in career completion %, 5th in career TD's, 2nd in career INT% (only Rodgers is better) which correlates to less INT's then pretty much everyone else above him on those lists (80th most ever, Manning is 20th, Elway 14th, heck even guys like Eli Manning, Warner, Dilfer have more career INT's), 22nd in TD% (tied with Peyton and Young and ahead of every other QB that you see in these conversations except Otto Graham), etc.

So while I think Brady is definitely over hyped, and certainly has benefited from the Patriots system, he has all the stats to clearly be one of the top 3 QB's since Elway retired and a top 10-15 QB all time (and depending on your metrics could realistically be in the top 5) and anyone that thinks otherwise is just crazy.

You can't ignore the evolution of the passing game brought on by a league determined to bring more offense to the table. To do so is moronic bordering on stupidity. Today's DBs can't barely touch a receiver, which allows for the timing passing game (with little receivers like the pats) to thrive.

You bring back the old rules, that the old QB's got their stats from, and Brady and the pats system is manhandled by bigger DBs who are able ot throw off the timing patterns-the very thing that people say is the way to be beat this pats offense.

To me, stats today aren't a fair measurable when going back in time to compare with the great gunslingers from before the "Mel Blount rule" came into being (1978 or 1979).

The breaking of Johnny Unitas consecutive game TD record does not hold the same value as when Unitas originally set the record. Todays video game rules is conducive to the breaking of the these legendary records and establishing other previously unreachable records/stats.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/25/2013 10:44:00 AM (view original):While that's legit, you still couldn't contact the WR with the ball in the air. I don't recall stacked receivers in the old days. Nothing from then, other than good tackling, stops the 3 yard slant from the back WR.

The biggest fear for receivers on the slant was the high throw (where they could literally get broken in half). Ask Darrell Stingley what can happen on a slant pattern. Watch some of the Pittsburgh-Oakland games of the 70's. Hell, watch the 49er-Steeler game of 1981 where Carlton Williamson laid out THREE Pittsburgh receivers in the middle of the field and got NO flags.

Nowadays, you're not allowed to hit a receiver on a slant if the ball is high. Hell, they're playing two-hand-touch in the middle of the field now.

The thing with Brady, is he has all of the stats. 9th in career yards, 3rd in career passer rating, 9th in career completion %, 5th in career TD's,

Some of that is a testament to his durability (outside the one missed season). However, the yards and TDs are as a result of not getting hit very frequently during most of his career not to mention having some great receivers later in that career.

The completion percentage and the rating are strongly influenced by his tendency to throw short much more frequently than other QBs. It's no secret that it's easier to complete short passes, and the Pats run a ton of screens and other short routes. This also influence his rating.

2nd in career INT% (only Rodgers is better) which correlates to less INT's then pretty much everyone else above him on those lists (80th most ever, Manning is 20th, Elway 14th, heck even guys like Eli Manning, Warner, Dilfer have more career INT's), 22nd in TD% (tied with Peyton and Young and ahead of every other QB that you see in these conversations except Otto Graham), etc.

I've said this before, but I'll touch on it again:

Brady doesn't throw many INTs because he's aware of his own inability to throw medium and deep routes with the kind of accuracy some other QBs have - the same kind of accuracy which is sometimes NECESSARY in order to make the plays that win some games. It's not a coincidence Brady improved so significantly in this area when Randy Moss had an all-world year hauling in most of his deep throws, and you could see the improvement in the wins column for the Patriots, all the way to 16-0 in the regular season.

The guys you mention have more INTs because they don't shy from throwing the deep ball into a window that sometimes closes. This can be a good thing in terms of less INTs, but when the game is on the line it can be a bad thing because you'll constantly be calling plays for short routes and/or checking down to short passes instead of making the play that could win the game.

BOTTOM LINE ON BRADY'S INTS: Brady sucks at putting medium to long range passes into tight windows. He's smart so he knows that, and as a result he usually doesn't try to put the ball in those places. So while he has less interceptions than other QBs who DO try those throws, he also gives up on plays that can and do make the difference that wins the game. He gets away with it only because the team is talented enough to win without those throws much of the time.

Sure, but it still means Brady is a top 2 QB of his era with Peyton. I mean unless you are telling me Brady had different rules than Brees, McNabb, Rothy, Eli, etc.

I put all of those guys ahead of Brady. They make more plays than he does, and he gets far too much credit for being on a winning team.

Can you do me a favor? Can you give me the names of the receivers below that are better than Deion Branch?

I would argue most of those guys are clearly better than Branch and some people might say all of them are better.

However, the teams those guys were on didn't have the defensive talent those Pats teams had. Plus none of those teams has been caught for cheating their way to a win like the Pats were with regards to that first SB.

By the way, I think the NFL was WAY too lenient in the penalties for "spygate." I say they should have given the Patriots the Lance Armstrong treatment - strip them from the Super Bowl title like it never happened. You cheat to get the win, you don't get to keep it. I'm sure the 2001 Rams players feel a lot like Armstrong's old foes (if any of them were clean, that is).

Can you do me a favor? Can you give me the names of the receivers below that are better than Deion Branch?

I would argue most of those guys are clearly better than Branch and some people might say all of them are better.

However, the teams those guys were on didn't have the defensive talent those Pats teams had. Plus none of those teams has been caught for cheating their way to a win like the Pats were with regards to that first SB.

By the way, I think the NFL was WAY too lenient in the penalties for "spygate." I say they should have given the Patriots the Lance Armstrong treatment - strip them from the Super Bowl title like it never happened. You cheat to get the win, you don't get to keep it. I'm sure the 2001 Rams players feel a lot like Armstrong's old foes (if any of them were clean, that is).

OK, so Brady was carried by his defense then, not his offense. We determined that his o-line was average at best, and my point with Branch is that there's no way his weapons during his Super Bowl run were above-average.

If Manning didn't have Harrison, Wayne, and statistically the 2nd best o-line in football, and instead was on the Patriots, with Branch, Givens, and the 23rd best o-line in football, what would you guess his numbers would look like?

How good is Harrison really? What I mean is that Troy Brown had by far a better year than Harrison did before Brady and Manning arrived on the scene. Maybe Troy Brown was better than Marvin Harrison and Harrison was elevated to the HOF type level because of Manning, but was in actuality a worse WR than Brown. Or maybe both were elevated. I mean look at Welker in Miami before ever joining New England, i.e. a good player, but became great with Brady.